viral load
Note well this matter. It is nearing completion reasoning that says that HIV-positive people on treatment are not vectors of infection. You can draw many conclusions. And one of them is that it is ridiculous and unfounded prejudice that causes people living with HIV (HIV positive) are discriminated against in the labor market. Another thing is that if you have not done the exam, you should do so as soon as possible. Because with this, if you are HIV positive, you can start your treatment and do not expose your health to opportunistic diseases thus lead a normal life. And, what is even more! You not had transmitted the disease in the event of camsinha burst because all this is not alvara to go around having sex without a condom. Hepatitis C is an STD and is more insidious and dangerous than AIDS, although it can be cured in some cases. Reflect.

No One With Undetectable Viral Load, HIV in 2 Study Partner PARTNER Transmitted HIV

in AIDS/viral load/Detectable Viral Load and Comorbidities/Viral Load and HIV Transmission/Undetectable Viral Load in the Partner Study/No One With Undetectable Viral Load Transmitted HIV/PEP/prep 155 views

No one with undetectable viral load transmitted HIV in Partner Study

HIV cellsThe second larger study to see whether people with HIV become non-infectious if they are on antiretroviral therapy (ART) found no cases where someone with a viral load below 200 copies / ml of HIV transmitted by anal or vaginal sex.

A statistical analysis showed that the most likely chance of transmission by anal sex from someone on successful HIV treatment was 1% per year and 4% for anal sex with ejaculation where the HIV-negative partner was passive.

But the true probability is probably much closer to zero than that.

When asked what the study told us about the chance of someone with an undetectable viral load, the lecturer Alison Rodger said: "Our best estimate is that it is zero."

Participants

Condom fri sign icon safe. Barrier contraceptive

Study HPTN 052, Undetectable Viral Load and HIV Transmission

The previous study HPTN 052, established in 2011 that the effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy to reduce HIV transmission from HIV-positive partner to the HIV-negative was at least 96% in heterosexual couples, but had very few gay couples in the study to establish whether the same was true to them (or instead of anal sex).

O PARTNER study was created to remedy this gap in knowledge. So far he recruited 1110 couples where partners have different HIV status - and about 40% of them are gay couples.

To participate in this study, couples have to be having sex without a condom at least part of the time.

The HIV-negative partner may not be using pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP or PrEP) and the HIV-positive partner must be on ART, with the most recent viral load below 200 copies / ml. This study is different from HPTN052 that mediates the efficacy of HIV-positive partners initiating therapy (versus partners who had not started).

In total, 767 couples participated in this interim analysis of two years and there was a total of 894 accompaniments contraceptives. Among heterosexual couples, HIV serostatus was divided into equal parts - in half the couples man had HIV and the other half, the woman.

Gay couples were and sex without condom with undetectable viral load

Some couples were excluded from analysis. In most cases, this was because they did not appear in the follow-up visits, but in 16% of cases it was because the HIV-positive partner has developed a viral load above 200 copies / ml, and 3% of cases because HIV partner -negative took PEP or PrEP.

There were significant differences between gay couples and heterosexual couples. At baseline, gay couples were doing unprotected sex for a period shorter on average: 1,5 years versus 2,5 for heterosexual men and 3,5 for women.

HIV-negative heterosexual partners with undetectable viral load reported having had vaginal intercourse without a condom, 72% with ejaculation

During the monitoring period, all heterosexual HIV-negative partners reported having vaginal sex without a condom, 72% with ejaculation; 70% of HIV-negative gay partners reported receptive anal sex with ejaculation 40%, while 30% reported only be the active partner. A significant proportion of heterosexual couples reported having had anal sex (will be reported later).

Unprotected sex outside the relationship was much more common among gay men - a third of HIV-negative partners reported that, versus 3-4% of heterosexuals. There is no doubt that because of this, sexually transmitted infections (STIs) were much more common in gay couples, with 16% of gay men developing an STI (especially gonorrhea or syphilis) during follow-up versus 5% of heterosexuals.

The results of unprotected intercourse with undetectable viral load

The main news is that the PARTNER until now there has been transmission in couples with a partner with an undetectable viral load, as was estimated to 16.400 occasions of sex in gay men and heterosexual in 28.000.

Although some of the HIV-negative partners became HIV-positive (the exact number will be revealed at a later analysis), genetic HIV tests revealed that in all cases the virus came from someone other than the primary partner.

Alison Rodger told the conference that the HIV-positive partners were not in treatment in this group, 50-100 (average: 86) transmissions would have been expected in gay couples, and 15 transmission in heterosexual couples.

No transmission is not the same as odds of zero transmission. The researchers calculated the 95% confidence intervals for the observed results. What this means is that they calculated the odds of zero transmissions being the fact 'true' and what was the maximum risk of transmission, given the observed results.

They established that there was a chance that 95% (in a couple where sexual activity is average for the study group) the largest possible risk of transmission of a partner was 0,45% per year and anal sex 1% per year .

In a press conference, Dr. Jens Lundgren, principal investigator of the PARTNER study, pointed out that this meant that there was a maximum chance of 5% over a period of 10 years, one in 10 partners in a gay couple who had sex unprotected anal could acquire HIV; also, well, it was more likely that your chance of acquiring HIV from their partners was very close to zero, and in fact could be zero.

As the group, the study group becomes smaller, as most become the confidence intervals and the certainty of a result becomes 'vague'. This means that the maximum probability of someone transmission chance in suppressive therapy of HIV in their highest degree was 2% per year for anal sex with ejaculation, 2,5% for receptive anal sex, and 4% for receptive anal sex with ejaculation. The latter figure implies more than one in three chance of infection if the sexual behavior remain unchanged for more than ten years, but again, this is one of the 'worst' scenarios and the likelihood is probably lower.

No transmission occurred despite relatively high levels of STIs, especially in gay couples. When the 'Switzerland Declaration' (Swiss Statement, in English) was released in 2008, she stated that people with an undetectable viral load did not transmit HIV, but made an exception in people with STI: the study PARTNER may be telling us that STIs (in positive or negative partners) do not increase the likelihood of HIV transmission if the positive partner is on ART and undetectable (although, of course, can still be transmitted to them).

The PARTNER is recruiting gay men and couples, as noted above, its full results will not leave before 2017. Until then we need to be careful about what he proved, and as Jen Lundgren said, will never be displayed with mathematical certainty that the risk of someone transmission in successful HIV therapy is absolutely zero. Furthermore, these results exclude situations where the failed ART HIV-positive partner, although there were few of these cases.

Gus Cairns

Tradução: Rodrigo Sgobbi Pellegrini

After the publication of this text there is more to be seen on this link and I advise you to read

viral load
I insist: Notice this matter well. The rationale is that the HIV positive people being treated are not vectors of infection. From this can draw many conclusions. And one of them is that it is ridiculous and unfounded the prejudice that causes people with HIV (HIV positive) to be discriminated against in the labor market. Another thing, is that if you have not yet taken the exam, you should do it as soon as possible. But I say: I, undetectable ten years ago, would not impose this risk on anyone

Reference:

The Rodger et al. HIV transmission risk through condomless fri IF HIV + partner on Supressive ART: PARTNER study. Conference on Retroviruses 21st and Opportunistic Infections, Boston, abstract 153LB, 2014.

Ads

Yes, this is the photo of me! My niece asked me to put this picture on my profile! .... I had here a description of me that one person described as "irreverent". This is really a euphemistic way of classifying what was here. All I know is that an "NGO" which occupies a building of 10 floors has established a partnership with me, and I have the logs of the partnership time, which was more a vampirism because for each 150 people leaving my site, clicking on them, there was, on average, one that came in. WHEN I ENTERED AND ENTERED

Comment

  1. And one of them is that it is ridiculous and unfounded the prejudice that causes people with HIV (HIV positive) to be discriminated against in the labor market.

Leave a Reply

Your email address Will not be published.

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment is processed.

The last since

Whatsapp WhatsApp Us

We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By accepting the use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.

Go to Top
%d Bloggers like this: